Clear Channel

Followers of our work over the past 15 years know that we’ve always taken a stand against against payola—the practice of well-heeled music companies giving cash or other enticements to big broadcasters in exchange for radio airplay. Technically, this practice is only illegal if it is not disclosed over the airwaves when the paid-for music is played. But over the years, the broadcasting conglomerates have found workarounds. Most recently, they established a system of so-called “independent promoters” who would funnel cash or other goodies to broadcasters without the major labels ever dirtying their hands. (Our Payola Education Guide offers a great overview of this pernicious practice.) read more

Imagine a radio format that plays “twice as many songs” by only playing about half of each song, in an attempt to cater to “the needs and lifestyle of today’s multitasking, attention challenged listeners.” It may sound like a joke straight out of Mike Judge’s Idiocracy, but it’s the actual concept behind QuickHitz, a syndicated radio format that is currently making news for all the wrong reasons. read more

You might think a two-time Grammy-nominee more than once named America’s Best DJ by DJ Times would be immune to label pressures. But as DJ and producer Kaskade explained in a series of tweets last month, that’s not the case. The frequent festival headliner (real name: Ryan Raddon) announced he is “in between labels,” leaving behind former label/publisher/mangement company Ultra Music (part owned by major label Sony): read more

This week, Clear Channel Communications, the nation’s largest broadcaster, signed an unprecedented strategic partnership with major record label Warner Music Group. For the first time ever, Warner’s roster of performers will be compensated for plays on American terrestrial (AM/FM) radio. (Currently, only songwriters and publishers are paid for radio airplay; performers and record labels recieve nothing.)

Clear Channel chairman and chief execute Robert Pittman lauds the move as “redefine[ing] the relationship between music companies and radio.” But in reality, the deal—like those struck by Clear Channel and Fleetwood Mac , Big Machine Records, and Innovative Leisure—is frustratingly limited. For one, it will not allow for the collection of money owed to artists for international radio play. Because the US doesnt pay foreign performers and sound recording owners for radio play on our shores, American artists receive no money when their music is played abroad. Reciprocity in royalties would require an act of Congress, something that the major broadcasters have fought tooth and nail to avoid. Never mind that the rest of the developed world compensates performers (with notable exceptions including North Korea and Iran). If Pittman truly wants to “redefine relationships,” he should encourage compensating performers across the board so that America no longer gives away a valuable export free of charge on the world market.

Last week, in an event that was called “the first of its kind,” Fleetwood Mac entered into a direct deal with broadcasting behemoth Clear Channel, wherein the celebrated rockers will receive a share of advertising revenue for spins of their new EP, and Clear Channel will save on performance royalties for its online broadcast and streaming services. (Keep in mind that AM/FM radio is not obligated to compensate performers, but under the terms of this deal, Fleetwood Mac will receive revenue from over-the-air plays.) read more

To anyone who loves truly local radio as much as we do, the “Local Radio Freedom Act” — the latest in a series of Congressional rumblings related to copyright and royalty issues — may sound like a noble cause. But look past the doublespeak title, and you’ll find that one man’s “freedom” is another man’s free lunch. read more

For decades, broadcasters have enjoyed an exemption that allows them to not pay performers and labels when they terrestrially broadcast music. This hardly makes sense, especially compared to digital services like Pandora or Sirius XM, which pay not only songwriters and composers, but also performers and sound copyright owners. This is why the recent deal struck between broadcasting behemoth Clear Channel and Big Machine Records to pay out for “terrestrial” spins seems so significant. read more

For decades, broadcasters have enjoyed an exemption that allows them to not pay performers and labels when they terrestrially broadcast music. This hardly makes sense, especially compared to digital services like Pandora or Sirius XM, which pay not only songwriters and composers, but also performers and sound copyright owners. This is why the recent deal struck between broadcasting behemoth Clear Channel and Big Machine Records to pay out for “terrestrial” spins seems so significant. read more

[…]Groups that advocate for musicians are happy to see the deal but they also believe it isn’t setting the right precedent. “Big Machine Records is an independent label with some superstar acts, so I imagine that some of those big name artists have considerable leverage and can get favorable terms in any deal,” says Casey Rae, who is with the non-profit music advocacy group Future of Music Coalition. “But it begs the question about all of the other artists out there who may not have that kind of bargaining power.” read more